Slashdot Mirror


Oracle Looks At Buying Novell

Several readers wrote to note Larry Ellison's comments about launching an Oracle Linux Distro (great! yet another!) and that Oracle has/is also looking at purchasing Novell. The great shake-out continues.

221 comments

  1. yay by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oracle Novell SuSE Desktop Linux!

    1. Re:yay by iggymanz · · Score: 5, Funny

      hey, that's GNU/Oracle-Novell-SuSE Desktop Linux!! GnoranoveSuSE?

    2. Re:yay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "hey, that's GNU/Oracle-Novell-SuSE Desktop Linux..."
       
      ...you insenstive clod!

    3. Re:yay by utlemming · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Better yet, just imagine how this would have some serious impact on our friends at SCO? They thought they were taking on IBM, and Novell got into the mix, but with an acquistian by Oracle you would have SCO up against IBM and Oracle -- two heavy weights. To really make it painful, Larry Ellision is not known for being a nice business man.

      --
      The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
    4. Re:yay by gclef · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nononono, it's Oracle Web Novell Enterprise Desktop.

    5. Re:yay by moro_666 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Orall Linux ...

      Suse suse for 5 dollars ? :p

      here goes my excellent karma, but i just had to say it ...

      --

      I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.
    6. Re:yay by YU+Nicks+NE+Way · · Score: 1, Funny

      Nah -- that's SuSe/Novell/Oracle Desktop Linux, or SNOracle Desktop Linux for short. (Which will quickly get renamed "SnorDebacle", after the combined company starts using Debian's technology, too.)

    7. Re:yay by antarctican · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We ditched Red Hat when they dropped their free distribution in favour of Fredora (really, what business wants to rely on a distro with a version life cycle of a few months?)

      So we went to SuSE because it had a longer upgrade cycle. Why am I filled with dread the moment I read the title, why can I see Oracle doing the same with SuSE that Red Hat did with it's distro - the free one becomes their test version with the public as beta testers.

      Well, I guess this means I can finally convince my boss to switch to Debian.

    8. Re:yay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      GnoranoveSuSE? Isn't that a STD?

    9. Re:yay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Novell Oracle SuSE Desktop Linux: NOS/DL. Also known as "Return of the Cyber".

    10. Re:yay by plopez · · Score: 1

      Running PeopleSoft... *shudders* .....

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    11. Re:yay by fallungus · · Score: 1

      Hasn't that already happened?

      --
      You call this a sig?
    12. Re:yay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not saying you didn't made a good choice but there are free enterprise grade Linuxes. Centos is a redhat enterprise recompile.

    13. Re:yay by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      GNU/Oracle-Novell-SuSE Desktop Linux

      GNU/ONS Desktop Linux?

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    14. Re:yay by kimvette · · Score: 1

      No it hasn't happened, not in the same way because OpenSUSE actually reaches a "stable" release, whereas Fedora is officially perpetually unstable.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    15. Re:yay by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      No, no, no.

      It's "Larry Linux"!

      Larry wants to take the name away from Linus! After all, everybody likes Linus and nobody likes Larry!

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    16. Re:yay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      hey, that's GNU/Oracle-Novell-SuSE Desktop Linux!! GnoranoveSuSE?

      Or in Average Joe's vocabulary... Gonorrea

    17. Re:yay by dwandy · · Score: 1

      GNU/Larix ?
      ...doesn't have the same ring to it.

      --
      If you think imaginary property and real property are the same, when does your house become public domain?
    18. Re:yay by kshade · · Score: 1

      "Larry Linux"? I thought that was Gentoo

    19. Re:yay by marktoml · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it more likely that the opposite would be true. It is unlikely that Oracle would focus on the OS as a revenue stream *directly* rather as an enabling technology for the rest of the stack they already sell. Naturally there would be the ability to buy support for th OS itself so that would add some value.

    20. Re:yay by antarctican · · Score: 1

      Not saying you didn't made a good choice but there are free enterprise grade Linuxes. Centos is a redhat enterprise recompile.

      Yeah, I've never liked Red Hat to begin with, so I was actually happy to be allowed to switch away from it during the whole Fedora switch. Of course I was a little bitter that I had just built a 50 node computational cluster using RH 9 about a week before they announced the discontinuing of the free distros.... sigh.

      I want my apt-get! I'm a Debian-boy stuck in a SuSE institution.

    21. Re:yay by TrekCycling · · Score: 1

      This is why I abandoned SuSE after using it for over 3 years. It looked completely and utterly unstable in terms of whether it was going to be supported tomorrow and in the same fashion as it is today. Now, of course, nothing has probably changed in that regard, yet. However this continued churn doesn't bode well for the future.

    22. Re:yay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be afraid...be very afraid!

      Question to Oracle: Linux? Answer from Oracle: ¥€$!
    23. Re:yay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say potato, I say "gnulix"

    24. Re:yay by Deathlizard · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I imagine this, and it scares me.

      I'm not too sure what Oracle would do here, but look at it from Oracle's Standpoint. They Don't like IBM (more Specifically IBM's DB2). Novell's sitting on patents that could theoretically swing the SCO Linux debacle both ways. Linux is one of IBM's big assets, and IBM is moving a lot of their platforms from AIX to Linux. If they buy Novell, they may just swing on the SCO side just to get at IBM to slow them down and spend money in the process.

      And it doesn't stop there. kicking Linux also gives MySQL a pot shot since most of their installs are Linux installs. Also a lot of their other competitors run on Linux software. If Oracle wanted to do the evil thing, they could side with SCO and set Linux back for a while and give their competitors headaches.

      On the other hand, Siding with IBM gives MS a kick in the groin. So it really comes down to who Ellison hates more in the end. Right now, I'm pretty sure it's Microsoft.

    25. Re:yay by killjoe · · Score: 1

      The err "conservative" release cycle for debian makes it the perfect server. You can let servers sit for two years without and upgrade which is still better then windows in most cases.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    26. Re:yay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be GNU/Oracle Novell Suse Linux Enterprise Desktop you idiot!

      Hmm, i think Gonsled has a certain ring to it :P

    27. Re:yay by sloanster · · Score: 1

      I would love a shot at your job in the so-called SuSE institution, so why do you hang around moping and wishing it were debian? Why not go find your debian gig?

      BTW pls send me your manager's email address, and we'll begin the dialogue.

  2. Not another distribution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Gentoo and Ubuntu ought to be enough for anyone. That's it. No more corporate Linuxes.

    1. Re:Not another distribution. by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Gentoo and Ubuntu ought to be enough for anyone. That's it. No more corporate Linuxes.

      What?

      What about Debian? (Ubuntu would have trouble without debian to fork every six months)

      What about Redhat? (They sponsor alot of stuff that goes into both Gentoo and Ubuntu)

      The great thing about linux is that people can go and do their own thing as much as they want - who cares if there's another distro - all the good bits will be ported back to Distro-you-use (tm).

      Frankly, I think Oracle Linux would be great (even if I'd never use it). Loads of corporations are vaguely interested in linux to run oracle on to save on the costs of Sun Hardware. An oracle CD they just pop into their drive, where everything just works would make life easier for them and smooth corporate acceptance of other OSS.

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    2. Re:Not another distribution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      I bet you liked having boot disks to play all those DOS games, too. (Yes, I've seen your nick and I don't believe you limited your game playing to Myst, Bolo, Marathon, and Spectre.)

      You run Oracle on Ubuntu, which is basically the replacement on Debian. You run everything on Ubuntu and it runs better than a commercial Linux. If everyone ran Ubuntu the world would be so much better. Imagine one central repository where everything could be collected, supported, and distributed. It'd be... just as perfectly-functional as Mac OS X, and Free as well!

    3. Re:Not another distribution. by spiritraveller · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Gentoo and Ubuntu ought to be enough for anyone. That's it. No more corporate Linuxes.

      Ubuntu, like RedHat, is maintained by a for-profit corporation whose goal is to make money for its shareholders.

      SHOCKERS!

    4. Re:Not another distribution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one needs gentoo. That some think they do just goes to show that script kiddies are idiots.

    5. Re:Not another distribution. by jonasj · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, Ubuntu is maintained by a non-profit foundation, that gets a lot of funding from a corporation that exists to fund and promote open source software -- not to make money for it's shareholder (not shareholders, since there is only one).

      --
      You know, Microsoft's street address also says a lot about their mentality.
    6. Re:Not another distribution. by durdur · · Score: 1

      And you call up Oracle and tell them about your Ubuntu
      Linux box, and they say "can you spell that?".

      If you want to run Oracle DB and have no support, then go
      ahead. But they won't support you doing this.

    7. Re:Not another distribution. by everphilski · · Score: 4, Insightful

      IF everyone ran Windows the world would be so much better. Imagine one central repository where everything could be collected, supported, and distributed.

      Now think about what you just said if someone from another vantage point said it. Just because its your favorite distro doesn't mean its right for everyone. Multiple vantage points is what keeps linux and the rest of the computing world competitive.

    8. Re:Not another distribution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ubuntu is run by the community. If the community would just grow cohesively instead of disparately, Ubuntu would be much better.

      Windows is run by the Micros$oft. Microsof$t does not care about community; it only cares about money.

      In conclusion: Ubuntu. Maybe Gentoo, but probably Ubuntu.

    9. Re:Not another distribution. by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      When Debian or Ubuntu allows me to configure the compilation of my packages without breaking a sweat, then you can say Gentoo is useless. Until then, go back to Windows.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  3. Oracle db over netware by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1, Funny

    Schweet, I can't wait...

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  4. Novell has been for sale for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Novell has been trying to sell itself for a long time. Periodically there's rumors about IBM them. Bottom line is that they're mostly a legacy company and nobody wants them.

    1. Re:Novell has been for sale for years by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 2, Funny

      You make them sound like Caldera. At least they have the rights to Unix.

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
    2. Re:Novell has been for sale for years by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      You mean Novell owns the rights to Unix, yes? SCO simply re-sells and pretends that they own *nix.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:Novell has been for sale for years by kimvette · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd prefer IBM buy Novell than Oracle. It'd be nice to see IBM be a software company again, and they have the marketing presence to put a real dent in Microsoft's market share. Once that happens not only will Linux become much better supported by both commercial vendors (I'd LOVE to see the Adobe Creative Suite and Ulead's media suites ported to Linux) and hardware manufacturers (maybe ATI cards will stop sucking, and maybe we'll even see accelerated drivers for the AiW line!). Another benefit is that Microsoft will be once again be forced to compete rather than rest on their laurels; we'll see vast improvements in maintenance scriptability (Don't tell me VBS is a solution; it isn't! VBS is a hack which has had major security holes), better customer support, prices more in line with what they should be charging, and they'll be forced to recognize that when customers buy software, they BUY software and actually DO have the right to sell used licenses on eBay when they decide to quit using it. Everybody wins in that case, whether you want to run Linux or Windows.

      Oracle? Oracle appears to be a company that buys companies for the same reason Microsoft does: to kill off any potential competition.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  5. oracle tuned by iggymanz · · Score: 4, Informative

    RedHat and SuSE are the usual "enterprise" distros that have tweaks for running Oracle, but Redhat dominates. wonder how threatened RedHat would be if Oracle bought and pushed SuSE. Oracle has had a problem in the past four years of trying to make integrated features that really were best left to third party, like for example oracle filesystem and oracle clustering, which are shakier and more trouble to admin than 3rd party.

    1. Re:oracle tuned by hackstraw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      RedHat and SuSE are the usual "enterprise" distros that have tweaks for running Oracle, but Redhat dominates. wonder how threatened RedHat would be if Oracle bought and pushed SuSE. Oracle has had a problem in the past four years of trying to make integrated features that really were best left to third party, like for example oracle filesystem and oracle clustering, which are shakier and more trouble to admin than 3rd party.

      RedHat threatened? How about Sun Microsystems?

      Back in the day, Sun's Solaris was the target for Oracle. Every other platform was a port of it, and reportedly not as good. I've only used Oracle on Solaris for big and important DBs.

      I've thought for years that Oracle should be an OS because an Oracle box is not going to be doing much else anyway. Oracle has its own filesystem, redundancy, clustering, you name it. Many of Oracle's "big boy" features are blurred between what an application does and what an OS does. Its common that the first thing you do when you install oracle is modify the OS to allow for Oracle to work. Most importantly, its the shared memory parameters of the OS that needs to be modified (or at least used to as of version 10).

      Having an Oracle OS seems inevitable. With Linux its more than possible.

    2. Re:oracle tuned by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      "Oracle has its own filesystem, redundancy, clustering, you name it. Many of Oracle's "big boy" features are blurred between what an application does and what an OS does."

      Yes , but compared to what an OS does thats still high(ish) level stuff. An Oracle
      DB doesn't catch hardware interrupts, doesn't set the data bus up for DMA, doesn't
      negotiate plug & play , doesn't in fact do any really to-the-metal type stuff. Just
      because Oracle does a few OS-ish type things , don't for a minute assume its anything
      close to being an operating system. If anything its more like a VM with knobs on.

    3. Re:oracle tuned by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      Sun sells Linux with its boxes if you really want it. and they are perfecting libraries to allow Linux apps to run on Solaris, in a vm-like partition for isolation if you want it. So Z just see Sun continuing to be an Oracle partner even if an Oracle distro comes out, just as Oracle will still sell Oracle for Windows and all the other major OS.

    4. Re:oracle tuned by digidave · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I sort of agree with you, but if I were Oracle I'd be much more interested in OpenBSD, wouldn't you? The license is much better for a company that wants to take the code and wrap it around a big proprietary product.

      --
      The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
    5. Re:oracle tuned by hackstraw · · Score: 1

      Yes , but compared to what an OS does thats still high(ish) level stuff. An Oracle DB doesn't catch hardware interrupts, doesn't set the data bus up for DMA, doesn't negotiate plug & play , doesn't in fact do any really to-the-metal type stuff. Just because Oracle does a few OS-ish type things , don't for a minute assume its anything close to being an operating system.

      I'm basing my opinions of being a Solaris admin who has worked closely with Oracle DBs to get the OS right for doing the Oracle DB.

      Oracle is an intensive application, more intensive than say, Access with 1 meg of data. There are strategies for filesystem layouts, memory caching, shared memory arrangement, semiphores, TCP/IP tuning, archive logging, redo files, networking, security, you name it. A decent sized Oracle DB is going to be on a dedicated box, the more important the data and the larger the DB the larger the individual boxes get and the number and distance between them increases. eBay uses Oracle. Do you think for a second that they will just put up on their website, "Sorry, the DB is down for a while, because we thought one 486 running Oracle without any redundancy was good enough. We are looking into the problem..."

      Today, data is pretty much expected to be available 24x7. Even slashdot has a pretty good availability, and they are just a website. Not ecommerce, inventory, banking, or anything more. Just a website. Slashdot uses memcached to increase responsiveness and reduce the load on their MySQL backend, so here is an example of a 3rd party integration between the app -> OS -> DB.

      And, why couldn't Oracle have kernel modules that handled interrupts and did DMA and whatnot? What if there were a new Oracle PCI-X card or over HyperTransport that did onboard caching and sorting of queries or even one that used RDMA between clustered boxes via the ? These things are entirely possible and probable.

      I've envisioned a DB in a box for years, much like a managed router or switch. Hell, I have a sub $100 wireless firewall and router that runs Linux, is buying a dedicated box for a DB with a dedicated OS much more science fiction than having Linux on my TV, DVR, pictureframe, printer, or router?

    6. Re:oracle tuned by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      That's true, but at one time I recall Larry Ellison touting the notion that Oracle's DB could end up being an actual operating system to compete with Windows. That was related IIRC to the concept of Windows having that database-like file system that Microsoft has never gotten working.

      It never happened, but I suspect something like that is in the back of his mind when he contemplates running his own Linux distro.

      In other words, tightly integrating the Oracle database and development tools into the Linux OS would pretty much make it easier for database servers to be set up. Now you have to install the OS, then tweak the OS to run Oracle and then install the DB. If Oracle did that already in their own distro, you just download the whole thing, blow it onto a server, and you're good to go.

      Of course, they could still sell the DB for other OS's and distros, but it would be pretty clear which one most people would buy. So they'd probably not lose many customers who want to run the DB on another OS, and they'd probably make up for that by having a combined OS/DB package.

      I'm not crazy about the idea of Larry buying one of the top two or three major distros, since essentially I don't think he would support them as "general purpose" distros anymore. They would be more for bundling the DB and that's it.

      On the other hand, I wouldn't mind Oracle doing its own distro - first because IF (and that's a big if) they executed well, it might be a great distro - or alternatively, if they merely used it to bundle the DB, it wouldn't have a particularly big impact on the other Linux distros anyway - but it WOULD make Linux a hair more acceptable in some corporations.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    7. Re:oracle tuned by hackstraw · · Score: 1

      I sort of agree with you, but if I were Oracle I'd be much more interested in OpenBSD, wouldn't you? The license is much better for a company that wants to take the code and wrap it around a big proprietary product.

      Honestly, I would use a BSD licensed product over a GPLed one, but Linux is a little more trendy now.

      Mirapoint sells "mailservers in a box" which uses BSD derived systems and some GPLed software as well, I believe. I think their spam filtering is Spamassassin, and their OS is FreeBSD. I've worked with medical imaging systems that were a custom configured Sun/Solaris system where you had to call their support to do anything that required root permissions.

      Dedicated OS/App solutions are not unique. Large fileservers have their own OS to it. Routers, firewalls, DVRs, you name it. I see this as a natural progression.

    8. Re:oracle tuned by killjoe · · Score: 1

      OPenbsd is not known for it's performance so that might be an issue.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    9. Re:oracle tuned by utlemming · · Score: 1

      Better yet, why would Larry want to buy Novell when he owns 33% of Redhat stock?

      It doesn't make since. Would the FTC let him buy Novell when he is the principle in Oracle and yet he owns a 1/3 of another, competing Linux distrubtion?

      So the real question is why does Larry want to own Novell and at the same time have his hands in the cookie jar with Redhat?

      If he makes SuSE Linux Enterprise the best version to run Oracle on then he is going against his financial interests in Redhat. But if he just wants to compete with MS then having SuSE and making it only available for the desktop would make sense. But he doesn't really do it in the sense of Redhat. Also, to make things more interesting, Oracle runs a Redhat support center.

      I don't think that Larry is telling us everything or what he has in mind. We all assume that Larry is doing this to make a Linux distro that will support the features of Oracle well, but the Redhat thing is really difficult to figure out.

      I would guess that RedHat would be the choice. It is interesting to note that other places are reporting that Larry might buy Redhat first, and then Novell second.

      --
      The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
    10. Re:oracle tuned by nettdata · · Score: 1

      From what I understand, Oracle is back using Solaris as its main development target.

      Also, the new Sun CoolThreads servers (T1000, T2000) are making HUGE inroads with Oracle customers, both new and existing.

      I've been doing Oracle for 15+ years now, and have gone from SGI, Sun, to Linux, as my preference for platform. I'm now back to recommending Sun as the best platform for running Oracle in Production. Best performance for cost/space, IMO.

      That, and Solaris 10 on Sparc rocks.

      --



      $0.02 (CDN)
    11. Re:oracle tuned by anime_boy · · Score: 1

      I can tell you for a fact, that Linux is still the Default Unix port for Database Development (Server Technologies), and has been for over a year. The Former Development Tools (Formerly under Sohaib Abbasi, before leaving Oracle) group which is now under ST (Forms, Reports, Discoverer, Jdeveloper) is still in a migration phase. ATG (Application Technology Group) is not planning to migrate their development until Fusion is finished at last report.

    12. Re:oracle tuned by nettdata · · Score: 1

      Cool... thanks... good to know.

      --



      $0.02 (CDN)
    13. Re:oracle tuned by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      "There are strategies for filesystem layouts, memory caching, shared memory arrangement, semiphores, TCP/IP tuning, archive logging, redo files, networking, security, you name it. "

      So? When I get in a rented car I adjust the seat, mirrors, air con
      etc. Does that make me the car? Of course not. How can tuning
      a few OS parameters make the DB anything like an OS?

  6. Novell's new tagline by path_man · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Novell's new tagline should be: We're the most rumored acquisition in Nasdaq! Seriously, what major corp hasn't been rumored to buy them? HP from wayyyyy back, IBM before the whole SCO thing, Cisco...

    I'm no 'net historian, but in this geek's memory, it sure seems Novell keeps coming out as low-hanging acquisition fruit. But then buyers get up close and realize "Hey, this fruit is rotten!"

    --
    The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us. -- Calvin & Hobbes
    1. Re:Novell's new tagline by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 5, Funny

      Naw, not rotten. Novell is a good company. Stable, boring.

      It's more of a pinecone. Nobody is sure what to do with it.

    2. Re:Novell's new tagline by path_man · · Score: 1

      Well said! I didn't mean rotten in the sense their products are junk... just that nobody can bring themselves to "pick" them. Okay, now I have to go wash due to excessive bad analogy usage...

      --
      The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us. -- Calvin & Hobbes
    3. Re:Novell's new tagline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody's buying Novell because Novell is living on past glories without much of a future. What do you get by purchasing Novell? A bunch of old NetWare customers, all somewhere in the process of migrating away to something else -- usually NOT Suse Linux. And a bunch of half-assed Linux R&D stuff with no business model.

      Novell like likely eventually spin SuSE anyway and sell the core business to Computer Associates or some other legacy graveyard.

    4. Re:Novell's new tagline by kimvette · · Score: 2, Informative

      What would be interesting is if Novell, MySQL, and Trolltech were to merge.

      Out of the distributions I like SuSE the best, and here's why:

        - Quickest time to get to real work

        - It's as close to plug & play as the distributions come

        - It uses fairly recent kernels

        - Its KDE configuration out of the box is the best I've seen

        - If you're into Gnome, it has a full Gnome configuration as well (I hate Gnome but my KDE is configured such that it looks like a mix of OS X and Gnome - what I hate about Gnome is the developers dumbed it down so much it removed any flexibility I need/want, and when I sit novices down at Gnome and KDE, they're invariably lost in Gnome. Windows and even MacOS have trained them to expect more functionality)

        - The retail version comes with a fairly good selection of packages

        - YaST is a dream for desktop configurations. On servers I use it for only package management but on desktops I primarily rely on YaST. For servers I go straight to the config files.

      Ubuntu is my second favorite right now. Mandriva used to be, but not any more. Ubuntu has matured a lot since I first tried it.

      Debian? Even though Ubuntu is a fork of Debian, I despise Debian - it's so out of date that I find a lot of machines won't even boot the install disc. I know a lot of people swear by Debian, but if it won't support the 915 and newer chipsets, it's not even an option. I haven't even attempted it on an nForce chipset but I'm sure that if it failed on even a now-outdated Intel 915 chipset, it won't be too friendly on the newer chipsets for AMD.

      Fedora? I keep trying it but I hate it. I've had trouble with the install disc booting on various configurations. RHEL? I hate working on it if I need X - its desktop configuration is the most disorganized I've seen, even compared to Slackware circa 1995. I used to like RedHat but from what I've seen they've taken leaps backwards - it seems as though they spent many man-hours planning the most counter-intuitive desktop imaginable. If I need RedHat or a RedHat-esque distribution, I run CentOS. I wouldn't pay for RHEL until they clean things up.

      I keep going back and revisiting various distributions every 6 months or so (I don't blindly choose the distribution) but I invariably end up going back to SuSE because it Just Works(tm) (well, I hit some snags in 10.0 in Evolution and in the KDE/Samba integration but fixed those issues, but 10.1 seems to have resolved those).

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  7. Is it just me? by pubjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is it just me, or does it seem like a lot of the IT companies don't get Linux and OSS.

    Hint to Larry (and IBM, HP, Novell, etc): Work together on a single distribution of Linux if you want to get rid of Microsoft. Commoditize the OS and make your money providing services and software on top of it.

    1. Re:Is it just me? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hint to Larry (and IBM, HP, Novell, etc): Work together on a single distribution of Linux if you want to get rid of Microsoft.

      Hint to pubjames: Larry, IBM, HP, Novell and all the others would go to bed with Microsoft without any moral qualms if it was profitable for them and if it wasn't a dangerous move in the long run.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:Is it just me? by solap · · Score: 1

      that would resonate with larry and the boys if the common goal were solely to eliminate microsoft. it doesn't work if the real goal is for each to supplant microsoft. that has always been the real goal for the anti-microsoft crowd.

    3. Re:Is it just me? by sperm · · Score: 1

      Wasnt it United Linux? What happened to that?!?? I guess its been dead/stagnant for 3 years now...

    4. Re:Is it just me? by Robert+The+Coward · · Score: 1

      SCO happened to that. As a member of United Linux they got taken over by the sue happy SCO and the rest of the vendors involved in that deal ran as fast as they could from it.

    5. Re:Is it just me? by kimvette · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No sane person wants to get rid of Microsoft. Eliminate Ballmer maybe, but not Microsoft. Competition is good, and aside from Microsoft's redefining terms like "downtime" to appear competitive and obfuscating configuration tools (e.g., tools like Exchange, Active Directory, the IIS metabase) Windows is a good choice for a good number of people. The costs need to come more in line with its real value and maintenance and configuration tools need to improve to bring the true TCO in line with other operating systems, but for a system that Joe Sixpack can click through and get a basic server configuration up and running, you cannot beat Windows. Linux is "getting there" from that perspective, and so is OS X server, but neither is quite there yet.

      Competition is good for everyone. You can bet that if Microsoft, Apple, and Sun were gone tomorrow and Linux were considered the be-all-end-all of operating systems, development sponsorship from corporate entities would decrease or simply stop and development would slow to a crawl.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    6. Re:Is it just me? by sperm · · Score: 1
      Oh ya...good point!

      But as they original thread said, I agree that there is still a need for a United Linux kinda thing.

      Or they (IBM, Oracle, etc) should simply support Ubuntu, which imho is our best chance so far from Redmond.

    7. Re:Is it just me? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Hint to Roscoe: Larry, IBM, HP, Novell and all the others have been in bed with Microsoft at one time or another. Whether it was profitable is another question ... probably not, since they seem to be sleeping in separate rooms nowadays..

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  8. Fragmentation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    SuSE is starting to be come fragmented from so many changes. Oracle would only be able to further complicate SuSE development. There have been many core changes since Novell bought SuSE and if gives SuSE that patched together feeling. Companies can't keep doing this to SuSE customers. SuSE customers need a stable reliable platform to develop upon.

    1. Re:Fragmentation by saleenS281 · · Score: 1

      If SuSE customers need that, they can move over to Redhat, it obviously doesn't bother the majority of them or they would've jumped ship long ago.

    2. Re:Fragmentation by TrekCycling · · Score: 1

      Or SuSE customers should just leave. I left for CentOS, which is more stable in my book. Which should tell you something about what all of this has done to perception of SuSE by some of us.

  9. So now we can look forward to... by Billosaur · · Score: 3, Insightful
    "We're missing an operating system. You could argue that it makes a lot of sense for us to look at distributing and supporting Linux."

    Ladies and Gentlemen, Larry Ellison proudly presents -- Orix!

    I for one am not jumping on this bandwagon, because Larry is driving and I don't think he has one hand firmly on the wheel as it is. This is a shotgun marriage and isn't liable to make Oracle any more competitive with Microsoft in the forseeable future. He should have probably done this 5 years ago.

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    1. Re:So now we can look forward to... by wild_berry · · Score: 1

      I'm not convinced that they understand that this is 'free' software which they can take and make their own editions of. It may be that Oracle want a brand to be well-known to businesses, but I think that Oracle Linux running Oracle Desktop Linux would be better for market awareness of Oracle than Oracle supplying Novell Suse Desktop Linux.

    2. Re:So now we can look forward to... by topher1kenobe · · Score: 1

      Bug Report:

      perl -e "print qq|I'd have to be pretty dumb to execute sig code!\n|;"

      returns

      -bash: !\n: event not found

      It should be:

      perl -e "print qq|I'd have to be pretty dumb to execute sig code\!\n|;"

      Now if I can figure out why my hard drive is thrashing so badly...

      --

      yadda

    3. Re:So now we can look forward to... by dugjohnson · · Score: 1
      That would be Oryx.....from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oryx An Oryx is one of three or four large antelope species of the genus Oryx, typically having long straight nearly upright horns...

      The Oryx, when seen from the side, appears to have only one single horn which leads to speculations that it is probably the animal initially mistaken for Unicorn myths.

      So a horned mythical operating system is in the offing.

      --
      My brain is overly lubricated
    4. Re:So now we can look forward to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they released an office suite would it be called Orifice?

  10. FT and eweek links by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
  11. In other news by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Mysql and postgresql are mysteriously missing from SuSE after the acquisition

    1. Re:In other news by MudButt · · Score: 1

      Mysql and postgresql are mysteriously missing from SuSE after the acquisition

      I wouldn't worry too much. Although I don't have data to support this, I believe that the majority of SuSE supporters are running either MySQL or PostgreSQL in their environments.

      Could Novell/Oracle really afford to have the thousands of enthusiests jump ship? These people provide the majority of the technical support and development to OpenSuSE. If they did exclude two of the highest profiled RDMSs, it would be the end of SuSE. Period.

    2. Re:In other news by bmo · · Score: 0

      "Could Novell/Oracle really afford to have the thousands of enthusiests jump ship?"

      I did. I did when Novell made noises that they were going to stop supporting KDE on SuSE. I still haven't seen <b>any</b> reason to go back. This latest development made it crystal clear to me that I should plan on not ever going back. With Oracle in the mix, there will be even more cooks to spoil the broth, and this Novell/SuSE broth has become pretty nasty as it is.

      --
      BMO

    3. Re:In other news by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You overreacted. KDE is still very much supported on SuSE. Why jump ship based on a rumour of what someone might possibly do when you can just as easily jump ship later if they ever actually do it. I am on OpenSuSE 10.0 now and the water is just fine.

      Years ago I was worried that what I was doing did not have much of a future and was looking at retraining doing something else. In the end I decided to carry on with what I was already specialised in and cross that bridge (retraining) when I came to it. I am still working on the same platform 20 years later, still worried that it is going to run out at some point but have noticed that some of the alternatives I was looking at back then no longer exist.

      Don't panic.

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
    4. Re:In other news by rainman_bc · · Score: 2, Funny

      I did. I did when Novell made noises that they were going to stop supporting KDE on SuSE.

      And yet YaST remains written in Qt... An annoying move on SuSE's part...

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    5. Re:In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      KDE is still very much supported on SuSE.

      In the same way that KDE is supported on Red Hat... by "the community". KDE is dead at Novell... the corpse occasionally outgasses when zealots like you make noise, but otherwise... all the Novell work goes into GNOME.

    6. Re:In other news by richlv · · Score: 1

      miguel ?

      --
      Rich
  12. Personal Vendetta by groovy.ambuj · · Score: 1

    I'll say the proposal of new distro lacks much substance and looks more like driven from Larry's desire to match/surpass Gates. Larry is known to pursue such deals to completion against (almost) everyone else's wish. This decision too is certainly not one of those to taken to reward shareholders.

    --
    This sig doesnt exist.
  13. Personally, by robyannetta · · Score: 1
    Personally, I think IBM should buy Novell.

    That would put a nail in the "SCO vs The World" coffin.

    --
    - Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
    1. Re:Personally, by Monkey-Man2000 · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, Oracle could want Novell so that they can make Novell no longer back IBM on the SCO vs. IBM case. This would potentially leave Oracle with the only legitimate Linux distribution and stack of enterprise software. It may be an added bonus for Ellison's ego and too sweet an opportunity to pass up.

      --
      This post was generated by a Cadre of Uber Monkeys for Monkey-Man2000 (603495).
    2. Re:Personally, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's not going to happen.
      SCO can't win. even if Novell disappeared, they'd still lose.
      there are too many other reasons.

      IBM is gonna crush them. plain and simple.

      I don't see anybody buying out IBM any year soon.

      PS my image test word today was "easter" ! ;)

    3. Re:Personally, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually think IBM already pulls the strings when it comes to Novell. During the whole SCO ordeal Novell was given 50 million from IBM (in support or something rather - can't remember). IBM's gotta have something up their sleave when it comes to their close relationship with Novell.

      Novells got great product, and I'm sure some very attractive IP/patents what not. I wonder how this possible aquisition rubs IBM.

      - Coz.. Too lazy to login.

  14. That's been out for a while. by khasim · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oracle on NetWare beens out for a while now.
    http://www.orafaq.com/faqnetwr.htm

    Personally, I think that it would be a bad move for Oracle to attempt to expand into the desktop OS/app market. They don't have the experience at that level.

    1. Re:That's been out for a while. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I think that it would be a bad move for Oracle to attempt to expand into the desktop OS/app market. They don't have the experience at that level.
       
      A company which has no experience in a given area tends to purchase another company that does have that experience. Which is why Novell purchased Suse in the first place.. It worked incredibly well for them, and it might have the same effect for Oracle..

    2. Re:That's been out for a while. by bernywork · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Umm Oracle Financials, the complete design and implementation, full Java front end, a complete dev environment... So they have an application dev environment, and all the applications they put out, now including PeopleSoft.

      Oracle supports Novell / Suse, Asianux and RHES as it stands now. As well as doing code contributions back to the kernel. Admittedly this is predominantly to do with their clustered file system, and some of the memory allocation stuff, but still, it's better than some. They also run a number of their servers on Linux as well. They would have to have one of the biggest commercial Linux installations around at the moment.

      So; they are doing application development on Linux, Linux kernel work, supporting the operating system through 3 or so distributions and a number of iterations thereof...

      Really, why not just buy Novell / Suse and take their staff who can help to support it, and who are doing exactly that now?!?

      --
      Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown
    3. Re:That's been out for a while. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On top of all that, I seem to recall that Oracle 11 is being developed using Linux as the reference platform. I may be wrong; I saw an article about it a while ago, but I can't remember for the life of me where I saw it...

    4. Re:That's been out for a while. by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1
      A company which has no experience in a given area tends to purchase another company that does have that experience.
      And then make an utter balls-up of running it. Mainly due to the fact that all the key people in the target company - the ones whose knowledge made it a desirable acquisition - get pushed out in favour of people from the new owners. Who have like, bought in, and are team players and so totally with the program and all that stuff.

      Makes you wonder if they think experience & competence are stored in the carpets.

      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
  15. Another Distro? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great! Another incarnation of Linux that NOBODY WILL USE (ok, the 1000 people or so that use it don't count because they'll be screaming so loud how great their distro is that they'll become part of the "Linux Roar") Linux doesn't suck, it just disappoints. When are people going to get freedom choice doesn't equal 20,000 partly working versions of a product? That's actually less freedom than 2 mostly working choices. Or, the freedom arguement that always falls apart when trying to get a soundcard or wireless to work...you've got to use this one, or this one, or this one, but not this one! BUT THEY ALL SHOULD WORK with a REAL OS!!! It's not really freedom of choice if you're locked into hardware choices that someone else has made, now is it? The wireless thing is hilarious too! The only consistently working drivers method uses drivers written for...WINDOWS!!! What would the l33t hax0rz do without windows drivers, huh?

    1. Re:Another Distro? by molarmass192 · · Score: 1

      You're right, can you please post instructions on getting XP to work on a 17" PowerBook G4 and a Sun 10000E ... I want a REAL OS (tm) too!!! You dime a dozen MCSE, point-and-click "techies" make me laugh. Bet you'd shit your pants if somebody took your precious precious mouse away. Oh btw, this is 2006, your driver crap logic hasn't been true since the last time Microsoft was over $30 a share.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    2. Re:Another Distro? by saleenS281 · · Score: 4, Informative

      driver crap isn't true? That's funny, my linksys/cisco card won't load on linux without using windows drivers, and it's till a crapshoot at best going about it that way.

      If I had a PowerBook G4, I'd load OSX onto it. If I had a Sun 10000E I'd load Solaris onto it, and you can bet your ass everyone else who bought one will too. Last I checked, when you drop 6 figures on a server you want support.

      That being said, your point is moot. Knowing I can run linux on a powerbook doesn't chang ethe fact my wireless doesn't work for shit. YOU are all that is wrong with linux right now. Instead of saying "hey, you're right, that's a problem we really need to fix" it's "well f you, that doesn't matter it's not important because of this and this and this". Stop patting yourself on the back, and stop trying to brush a serious problem under the rug. I can only be happy people like yourself aren't running the show or linux would've never made it out of Linus's dorm room.

    3. Re:Another Distro? by hunterkll · · Score: 1

      bcm43xx.berlios.de You were saying, about those linux drivers for that AE?

    4. Re:Another Distro? by stefanPryor · · Score: 1

      The nice thing about linux is that you do not need to rely on others to fix your problems. If you find some unsupported hardware and you really want to use it you can make it work yourself. Then everyone else who uses linux can use that hardware too. This requires a certian level of skill and tenacity however, but anyone with time and persitance can learn any skill (generally speaking; some exceptions).

    5. Re:Another Distro? by vastabo · · Score: 1

      Have you ever written a device driver? There are so many different skills required that it baffles my mind . Let's see what you'll need (in no particular order):

      A working knowledge of C (I've been at it for several years and I wouldn't exactly call my code brilliant)
      A working knowledge of Linux's architecture (hey! there are books on the subject, depending on how fast you catch on, you could sorta understand it in a couple of months)
      A working knowledge of the subsystem you're working on (what does a wifi driver need to do? how does a sound card work?)
      Very specific knowledge of the particular device you want to support (good luck with this one--you'll being reading NDA-restricted docs if you're lucky, reverse-engineering windows drivers if you're not)
      Time to write this fantasical piece of code (it takes me an afternoon to talk to a PLC over an RS-232 port, but I'm not particularly bright).

      How about this--admittedly anecdotal, but somewhat relevant--I'm a 4th year CS major and I've been running Linux since 1997. I've been schooled in C, Linux architecture (nothing heavy), machine language (MIPS, not exactly relevant), and have a fairly good understanding what the magic box does and how it does it. I couldn't write a sound driver; it would take me months to even begin to try.

      And you want Joe Schmoe to bang out a driver with little more than "time and persitance" and the warm, fuzzy feeling of contributing to the great Open Source OS?

    6. Re:Another Distro? by stefanPryor · · Score: 1

      I have never needed to write a device driver. I have only been using linux for 2 years, and have only programmed in fortran (computerized math). I am just starting with scheme. It will take me some time before I become skilled enough to even begin to attempt to write a device driver for undocumented hardware. Still there is a ton of documentation out there, and If I was to undertake this task "time and persistance" would be exactly what was required.

      I dont expect Joe Schmoe to write his own device drivers, I expect him to pay somebody much more productive than he is to "make it all just work".

  16. Apples & Oranges by MudButt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Work together on a single distribution of Linux if you want to get rid of Microsoft

    I don't think their goal is to get rid of Microsoft, per say. When you buy an automobile, you have the choices ranging from sedans to minivans to heavy duty trucks. Does the Ford F350 really "compete" with a Honda Civic? Does a person purchase a vehicle and decide between the two of those? Not for the most part. For the most part, I've seen IT professionals pick the right tool for the job. When I need to deploy a Microsoft solution, it's usually because it's the best fit for the job. When I need to deploy and Linux solution, it's usually because it's the best fit for the job.

    IMHO, there are very few instances where and educated IT professional could actually have to compare a MS or OSS solution in the same way a car buyer would compare a Ford F350 and Honda Civic.

    1. Re:Apples & Oranges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      When I need to deploy a Microsoft solution, it's usually because it's the best fit for the job.

      So you have people at your company who spend all their time gaming?

    2. Re:Apples & Oranges by wtansill · · Score: 2, Informative
      I don't think their goal is to get rid of Microsoft, per say. When you buy an automobile, you have the choices ranging from sedans to minivans to heavy duty trucks. Does the Ford F350 really "compete" with a Honda Civic?
      I think you miss the point. The reason that M$ has been wildly successful ("success" being defined by the fact that they own > 90% of the desktop space) is that they came out with a standard way to interface with the underlying system (yeah, I know -- 16/32 bit API's. Still...). To my knowledge, Linux hasn't achieved that. Part of that is by design -- the folks who do Suse have a different vison than the folks who do say, Mandrake. Still, if you want to dislodge M$ and have far greater desktop penetration, you need to have a standard to which various vendors can write.

      If I'm missing something, please feel free to enlighten me.
      --
      The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power. -- Daniel Webster
    3. Re:Apples & Oranges by MudButt · · Score: 1

      So you have people at your company who spend all their time gaming?

      LOL, I know you're probably joking... But here it goes anyway. We currently implement Windows for the following:

      - Lotus Notes Client
      - Macola Progression
      - ACT! Premium for Workgroups
      - AutoCAD Mechanical
      - Macromedia Studio

      Those are just the apps off the top of my head. And I work in the manufacturing industry, so my scope is even limited in that respect. I'm sure there are other companies running Windows only apps.

      Again, you're comment was probably in jest... At least I hope so! =)

    4. Re:Apples & Oranges by MudButt · · Score: 1

      Still, if you want to dislodge M$ and have far greater desktop penetration, you need to have a standard to which various vendors can write.

      I guess this is the idea I'm questioning. Is Novell/IBM/Oracle/HP/'s goal to "have far greater desktop penetration"? I don't see that. The server/networking environment is the bread and butter for these companies. I think their goal is to get an easy to install, point and click, stable distro for their servers which also gives the System Admin the ability to tweak and customize on a green screen to their heart's content. I don't know about you guys, but I LOVE being able to drop into root and play on my production systems. (j/k). But seriously, the ability to mold the environment for your individual needs is something I can only do in Linux. The desktop? I don't see that as a big concern. We pay $99 for an OEM copy of XP. It's the SQL Server / Windows Server 2003 / Visual Studio licenses that kick our a$$.

    5. Re:Apples & Oranges by RPoet · · Score: 1

      I don't think their goal is to get rid of Microsoft, per say.

      But if they did, oh well, say la vee.

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
    6. Re:Apples & Oranges by wtansill · · Score: 1
      But seriously, the ability to mold the environment for your individual needs is something I can only do in Linux. The desktop? I don't see that as a big concern. We pay $99 for an OEM copy of XP. It's the SQL Server / Windows Server 2003 / Visual Studio licenses that kick our a$$.
      Yeah, but then there's the Office Licenses too. And Photoshop. And AutoCad, and other apps that you can only seriously run on Windoze. Those all cost big $$$ as well (and IIRC, the next Office version will virutally require an Exchange back end, even if you don't use Outlook for mail/calendering. If you had a viable, stable Linix desktop, more vendors migh be inclined to create and support linux versions of Office productivity suites (yes, I know about and use OpenOffice at home, as well as Thunderbird, but AFAIK, there is no equivalent calendering solution). Then again, I'm not a Linux weenie, so I could very well be quite wrong.
      --
      The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power. -- Daniel Webster
    7. Re:Apples & Oranges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's per se

    8. Re:Apples & Oranges by online-shopper · · Score: 1

      you look at Kontact

    9. Re:Apples & Oranges by ccp · · Score: 1

      I don't think their goal is to get rid of Microsoft, per say.

      But, since Microsoft's goal appears to be getting rid of everybody else, Oracle et al will have the battle forced upon them. It is not if , but when , and they know it much better than you or I.

      And, sorry for nitpicking, but is per se .

      Cheers,

      CC

    10. Re:Apples & Oranges by MudButt · · Score: 1

      And, sorry for nitpicking, but is per se .

      I don't mind at all, thanks, it probably would help my case if I didn't spell like a 10 year old. =)

    11. Re:Apples & Oranges by ccp · · Score: 1


      it probably would help my case if I didn't spell like a 10 year old. =)

      Gentlemanly or sarcastic?
      I'm afraid my English isn't good enough for nuances ;>)

      IMWTK

      Cheers,
      CC

    12. Re:Apples & Oranges by MudButt · · Score: 1

      Gentlemanly or sarcastic?

      Gentlemanly. My grammer and spelling is poor, as I'm a product of the American public school system. =)

    13. Re:Apples & Oranges by ccp · · Score: 1


      Gentlemanly

      Glad to know.

      Best wishes,
      CC

  17. whatevar by JeanBaptiste · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm running DBase II over Banyan Vines.

    1. Re:whatevar by Maljin+Jolt · · Score: 1

      I'm running DBase II over Banyan Vines.

      Cool. Now I feel quite ashamed with my dBaseIII over LANtastic.

      --
      There you are, staring at me again.
    2. Re:whatevar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about the Pick database over X.25?

  18. XANDROS would be a much better buy by LINM · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Xandros would be a much more appropriate acquisition:

    1) Best in class business desktop
          -Best desktop: LinuxWorld best business product
          -Focused on the business user (vs the Novell Gnome focused desktop that is more all-purpose / home user market)
          -Designed to provide an easy transition for Windows users (vs all of the other distros - more below)

    2) Best in class Linux "business" server
          -The new Xandros server offers the print serving, file serving, network management needed to run small businesses. I
          -Provides unique capabilities (apart from Microsoft) that would instantly differentiate Oracle from all the other "me-too" Linux players
          -Designed to provide an easy transition for Windows users (vs all of the other distros - more below)

    3) Better strategic fit
          -Xandros is a pure play in the Linux area and would not come with the "hair" and unwanted, sub-leading products that Oracle would pick up from Novell (and have to pay for)
          -Xandros comes on top of the Debian server architecture. This would be an immediate and powerful win for Oracle to pick up the Debian Server base.
          -Top business focused engineering team with long track record of efficient engineering (that delivered the award winning Corel Linux Desktop)
          -Xandros was founded as an Simple Compatible replacement for Windows and Microsoft solutions that would provide an easy transition for Microsft users. Compared to the other Linux distros that have been laboring hard to create a new better product albeit alien to the marketplace. This company has not deviated from this strategy (plans for this server were announced years ago).

    --

    Hunger is the best sauce.

    1. Re:XANDROS would be a much better buy by filesiteguy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, I'd disagree with your (otherwise valid) reasoning for one issue - Novell has a world-class network admin software (Zen, I believe) and a whole host of people still running NetWare. I think from an Oracle perspective, that would be more tasty than a desktop like Xandros (which I haven't honestly tried) that is percieved to be more of a home-based system.

    2. Re:XANDROS would be a much better buy by cloudmaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Xandros is a modified Debian - not a totally separate distribution like SuSE (I know, they stopped the mixed-case capitalization, but I like the dropped u). So, "buying" Xandros really wounld't be the same thing. They wouldn't really be getting a whole distro, just a team of people who modify someone else's distro. Xandros would not necesarily be "bad", but with Novell, they'd get the actual point of origination for a distro. And Novell has a bunch of other cool stuff beyond SuSE, like the zen management things and a big respected (generally) name, among others...

      Nevermind, of course, that Ubuntu's better than Xandros (Corel didn't go away because it was a great distro). ;)

    3. Re:XANDROS would be a much better buy by ameoba · · Score: 1

      1) Oracle doesn't care about the desktop - have you looked at Oracle Forms? Hello VB circa 1995.

      2) Oracle's not trying to replace Windows servers with this, they're looking to provide a transition from Solaris to low-cost x86 hardware. As for configuring other services, you just don't run other services on your Oracle box. By the same token, being suitable for 'small business' isn't really a concern here.

      3) You've got this one - Novell's got their fingers in too many pies, but you're still thinking of them using Linux as a replacement for Windows. People don't run serious Oracle servers on Windows.

      --
      my sig's at the bottom of the page.
    4. Re:XANDROS would be a much better buy by mikesd81 · · Score: 0

      I've tried Xandros and it's not too shabby. Just some problems w/ my sound.

      I'm not sure it would be such a bad thing for Oracle to purchase Xandros. They have some neat server packages too. Such as http://www.xandros.com/products/business/xdms/xdms _intro.htmlxdms and their server http://www.xandros.com/products/business/server/se rver_intro.html.

      This would be equally good for xandros because they have a business desktop too, so oracle would be able to go two fronts, business and home.

      --
      That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
    5. Re:XANDROS would be a much better buy by charlesnw · · Score: 1

      I fully agree with this. Excellent points all around. Being debian based would be very interesting.

      --
      Charles Wyble System Engineer
    6. Re:XANDROS would be a much better buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Xandros is selling their Business Edition linux in boxes at $100US each, it joins a Windows 2003 Domain by clicking a dropdown and specifying a server name, all users on the Domain can log into the computer without setting up accounts under Linux, comes with VPN, comes with SAP and Citrix clients, etc. Ubuntu is free and doesn't have much proprietary components. For Oracle investing in Linux it makes more sense to buy into a distro with revenue streams and proprietary components they can charge money for. Ubuntu makes no sense for Oracle at all. The fact Corel got out of Linux has nothing to do with the quality of the distro they created. Corel is a business and they were in the desktop market before businesses were even considering buying Linux desktops and that wasn't a winning combination. Corporations are going to choose Linux they can buy from a company... e.g. Red Hat, Novell, or Xandros. The sales Xandros can show Oracle will be more than most other distros (excluding Red Hat, Novell, and perhaps Linspire and Mandriva) because they actually sell their Linux rather than have a free download. Free is great for home users, education, invention, etc... it isn't great for a company trying to make money.

  19. A bit more of that. by khasim · · Score: 1
    Hint to Larry (and IBM, HP, Novell, etc): Work together on a single distribution of Linux if you want to get rid of Microsoft. Commoditize the OS and make your money providing services and software on top of it.
    You don't even have to work together. Just identify the items that would prevent YOUR company from migrating to Linux and work with various teams focused on those areas to bring them up to where YOU would feel comfortable deploying it.

    If you're too tied to MS Office then contact the OpenOffice.org people and help with that.

    If the desktop isn't 100% the way you want it, then contact the GNOME or KDE people and help with that.

    You get the results you want at a FRACTION of the price of "buying" a whole distribution.

    Stay agnostic. Focus on the apps/functionality YOU need. Don't focus on a specific distribution or distributor.
  20. Benefits vs Dangers by xzvf · · Score: 1

    Big company supporting Linux...Yea Oracle support for Linux...Good already Larry owned a big chunk of the Linux market...??? It's likely we'll shake out to two enterprise Linux distributions. Just to hard for the majority of large companies to roll and support their own distribution. Most companies will outsource their open source participation. Interesting comparisions on the market from two big companies. IBM is divesting from commodity software to open source (Websphere Community Edition/Apache Geronimo, Cloudscape/Apache Derby) Plus they've never attempted to build their own distribution, or buy a distribution company (both of wich could have been easily done). Oracle is buying open source companies and building a commodity stack. Possibly to have control of where and how their products perform. Buying Novell would give them an OS, plus a bunch of other stuff including headaches. Red Hat (a very small company) is building an open source software stack and trying to turn it all into a commodity. Kind of like Dell with desktop/laptop hardware, except with software. They are trying to be the best support and packaging for stuff you can get off the shelf. Interesting business models.

    1. Re:Benefits vs Dangers by podperson · · Score: 1

      Wish I could mod something "needs whitespace"

      It seems to me that you don't *need* to buy a distro or own a distro, you need in-house expertise. There's no point "buying" an open source company if the engineers etc. leave, and if you hire the engineers then the company is basically dead.

      It seems to me that the reason IBM isn't buying distros is that (a) it understands this, and (b) it doesn't need to (because it already has the expertise). What Ellison is revealing by making his statements is that either he doesn't understand this OR he does understand this but feels Oracle lacks the in-house expertise to build its own distros and needs to get it fast OR he's just saying random garbage to try to sound cool. Or perhaps he just wants to get sued by SCO!

  21. Does this move make sense? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Oracle does indeed proceed with its version of Linux, either from acquiring a Linux firm or rolling out its own, it will no doubt be competing with MS. Oracle has had many battles with MS in the
    past, but there hasn't been much development recently.

    I wonder if there's a more personal side (Ellison vs Gates) to this decision or does this decision make commerical sense. It would be bad if this move distracts Oracle from their main competitive advantage: databases.

    The other possibility is that it may be thinking of a Use-our-OS-and-our-app-will-run-better tactic.

  22. Why stop there? by jayhawk88 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hell, let's get Sun into this deal somehow too! Then we could have the trifecta of old school struggling tech companies bound by a hatred of Microsoft.

    1. Re:Why stop there? by OneFix+at+Work · · Score: 1

      Actually, I haven't heard anything about the Apple / Sun merger recently...the origonal deal fell through, but it always comes up from time to time...

    2. Re:Why stop there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's add SCO for an extra margin of wackiness

    3. Re:Why stop there? by smodak · · Score: 1

      Hell Why not ? Sun can provide the hardware. As long as Scott McNealy doesn't rock the boat by claiming Solaris is better than Linux. On the other hand, Larry Ellison can get a few engineers to foist the Solaris kernel onto Novell Linux (kinda like Nexenta) to preempt Scott's Solaris rants

    4. Re:Why stop there? by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Sun kissed and made up with MS a while back. They also jointly funded the SCO lawsuit by buying linux licenses from SCO. They are quite close buddies now.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  23. Rumors preempted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Rumors of a Novell buyout by Oracle were pre-empted today when Redhat officially announced their aquisition of Novell.

    It seems, though that all may not be lost for Oracle. Redhat has indicated that Novell will sell off their Suse division before the Redhat-Novell merger is completed.

    "We have been trying to work this deal for a long time," said the head janitor at Redhat's Sao Paulo, Brazil offices. "Why do you think we ejected 'Fedora Directory Services'? We're ready to push eDirectory to its full potential!"

    Officials at Oracle did not comment. But a chair was heard smashing against a wall in Redmond, WA.

  24. This is a great idea... by DeionXxX · · Score: 1

    This is a great idea. All of the Oracle installations I'm currently managing are running a version of Linux. This requires that not only do we need a good dba, but a linux administrator to maintain those machines. Luckily, we have other linux machines so we didn't need to hire a new guy just to manage the new linux boxes. With the new Oracle Linux Distribution, Oracle would provide the support, updates, etc for the OS, so we wouldn't need to have a full time guy to test software upgrades with our current Oracle installations, or to troubleshoot errors. This would solve a lot of headaches, and get more companies to use Oracle and Linux.

    1. Re:This is a great idea... by fimbulvetr · · Score: 4, Interesting

      so we wouldn't need to have a full time guy to test software upgrades with our current Oracle installations, or to troubleshoot errors

      LOL. You've never worked with Oracle software have you? They have a very hard time releasing patches, much less testing them. I've spent dozens of hours on the phone with RH, IBM, Oracle, etc, and Oracle are the _last_ people you ever want to due to their gross incompetence and intentional disregard for anything you might know or claim to know.

    2. Re:This is a great idea... by QAChaos · · Score: 1

      yeah my co workers also thought this was a good idea but that was in 1999 when Oracle just came out with a database for linux....we were hoping that they would come out with their own distribution with the database already installed and tweaked .... I guess better late than never .... I also remember on the first version of the database they misspelled linux and then on the next version they said the database was for the linus operating system. QAK

    3. Re:This is a great idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've done about 10 installs and 20 patches with no problems. Maybe there's a reason they disregard anything you claim to know. Maybe they recognize your incompetence.

    4. Re:This is a great idea... by DeionXxX · · Score: 1, Interesting

      So far I've done several fresh installs and 2 upgrades from 8i to 10g in the past quarter. Everything has run rather smoothly. It'd be nice if the OS was already pre-configured to support Oracle. Since the boxes only run Oracle, and no other software, I wouldn't mind using an OS which was fully supported by Oracle, so I wouldn't have to call RH, or look up solutions on Google.

    5. Re:This is a great idea... by fimbulvetr · · Score: 1

      Browse any patch release notes on Metalink, more often than not they cause more issues than they fix. These are issues _the patch_ caused, not software had before, not issues the patch fixes, _the patch caused_. Either you are just fine with checking the release notes and rigorously ruling out any possible issues as well as just fine with fact that most patches cause more problems than they fix, or you haven't yet convinced yourself that you have quite possibly the most inane and absurdly ridiculous responsibilites in all the world of sysadmin'ing.

      Granted, we all run across bugs, but we shouldn't have to be alpha/beta testers.

  25. hypocrites by towsonu2003 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    FTFA:
    "We're missing an operating system. You could argue that it makes a lot of sense for us to look at distributing and supporting Linux."
    Well, if you want to support Linux, give money to Linux-related open source projects you like. Coming up with a new distro with the argument of "supporting Linux" is not logical.

    PS. I know and support the argument that the huge number of distros is a benefit of Linux. But an Oracle Distro? I don't buy that...

  26. Say it isn't so! by Horatio_Hellpop · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Novell Suse Linux 10.0 is the *FIRST* and *ONLY* desktop distro I've tried (RHEL, FC4, Mandriva, Linspire, Ubuntu) that has properly detected all my hardware and installed with barely any tweaking.

    It's been a dream.

    Novell ... please don't let Oracle destory it! Please!

    --
    Frammin' on the jim-jam, frippin' at the krotz!
    1. Re:Say it isn't so! by alexmipego · · Score: 1

      what the hell does that have to do with Oracle/Novell? All "driver" and most hardware detection stuff is done at kernel level... you know... Linux is THE Kernel, a distro is not more that some software for Linux packed in a CD. Some distros do actually perform some tweaking at kernel level to improve hardware support and detection, but even then they are usually back porting fixes from "future" linux versions, so... I don't see much creadit in there - sorry. Have you tried FC5? Or any other distro that does have at least the same kernel version as SUSE 10? Btw - I tried that too in a Pentium D and I have to say its hardware detection sucked, bluetooth doesn't work well and much more problems... Fedora didn't fail in the same machine...

  27. Why? by geoff+lane · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Why would Oracle want Novell? A company like Oracle could knock up a Linux distro in a short time but why bother when they could just cross-license for a fraction of the cost. Do they want the residual Novell netware customers? Unlikely. Is it just a case of "because we can"?

    But when Novell and IBM have finally kicked The SCO Groups butt, Novell ends up with a clear legal right to Unix. A paranoid person might wonder if Oracle is after Unix for some reason.

    1. Re:Why? by dmorelli · · Score: 1
      A company like Oracle could knock up a Linux distro in a short time but why bother

      It seems to me it's similar to free web-based projects getting bought (like Craigs, Bloglines). The buyer is interested in the customers. In this case, the companies (and I guess individuals) who are already committed and/or excited about SuSE.

    2. Re:Why? by hackstraw · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why would Oracle want Novell?

      Brand recognition. 90% of Oracle's business comes from suits that sit in their office and say, "We need Oracle to drive the DB for this project!" Even suits that have previously negotiated and paid Oracle's licensing before.

      Oracle could buy/use/exploit any of the hundreds of Linux distros, and the result would or could be about the same. Picking one of the top two Linux distros known in the business world seems to make sense. Would you really think that picking something called something like Ubuntu, Mandriva, Linspire, Slackware, or Puppy Linux would have better brandname recognition and perceived esteem over Novell and SuSe?

    3. Re:Why? by SWroclawski · · Score: 1

      It's a buisness decision and it's about core competancy.

      Oracle is a software development company. They have decidated staff who develop and support a core set of products.

      When looking at a new product line like "Oracle Linux"- they'll need to spend resources on it. Resources will include developers, project managers, physical space, computers, the whole thing. If they use existing staff, they'll have to be retrained in a new area of development. And it's all untested- essentially a crap shoot as to whether or not it will all work out.

      Buying another company solves all the resource problems, and Suse has a track record of success. It's a safer bet.

  28. Re:XANDROS is a pile of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're on crack right??

    Xandros is about kin to linspire. if it can even be that good.

    I used it for a while (all of about an hour)

    it was the worst pile of dreck I've ever seen. (next to linspire)

    even red hat was better than this crapola.

    PS I also hate debian and gentoo... I dont see a reason for them to exist actually.

    Just use SUSE.

  29. Re:XANDROS is a pile of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like the GNOME anonymous flameheads are back.

  30. Re:;mod 0p by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been saying this for years and no one will listen!

  31. Its strange by T-Ranger · · Score: 1

    Over the last month or so I've been demoing ZENWorks (for desktops). "Out of the box", installing the management component of zfd on Linux (OES/SUSE), it installs sybase as the backend for the inventory database. Documentation describs how to configure the inventory system to use Oracle and MSSQL on Windows, with ODBC. This is undocumented on the Linux side, which might indicate its not possible to use an alternative DB, or at least that its not supported.

    Novell Audit, out of the box, supports MySQL, which is to say that the install process will install mysql, and the documentation covers configuring mysql, in addition to configuring Audit to use it. The documentation covers using Oracle, MSSQL, and JDBC in general, which is to say configuring Audit to use them.

    So which is it, Novell? Is your default database of choice MySQL, or Sybase? If MySQL is good enough for a secure logging system, surely it is good enough for deskop inventory. Why do you think its a good idea to bundle YA database with ZFD when you know that the two linux distros you supoort (SUSE9 and OES1) ship with MySQL?

    Novell definitly has a lot of internal struggles going on (gnome/kde, java/mono), but it should at least be able to provide a consistent level of inconsistencies.

    1. Re:Its strange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Novell definitly has a lot of internal struggles going on (gnome/kde, java/mono)

      Neither of those two things are internal struggles at Novell. KDE is dead for commercial use... and Novell pushed it out into the community just the same way Red Hat did. Java vs Mono is also no contest. Novell is racing headlong down the Mono route, with support for Java for sure -- but all the VM-based language work within Novell is for Mono.

    2. Re:Its strange by T-Ranger · · Score: 1

      I guess the battle ground then is Gnome vs Time and Mono vs Time. Can/will they built a GTK front end onto yast before the qt fe starts to rot away to ... at the very least, uglyness (where ugly is defined as incosistant)? Can/will they rebuild ConsoleOne and/or iManager in Mono? Hell, C1 doesnt even support all objects and attributes then did nwadmin; some snapins for C1 (Im looking at you, zfd) are Windows only, which may or may not mean they are written in Java.

      And its not just a matter of uglyness/inconsistancy. You only have finite numbers of developers, with finite skill sets. You can only maintain a finite number of core libs for a finite number of platforms. At Novell you cant just say "Support the management of existing products and features with c1 and imanager; new products are managed with our new Mono thingy" because both c1 and imanager are supposed to be the all-in-one management tool (I think they come reasonably close to an all-in-two toolset).

    3. Re:Its strange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can/will they built a GTK front end onto yast before the qt fe starts to rot away

      Probably... but then Qt isn't really the problem... that'll remain installed by default (just like stuff like Motif). It's the KDE libraries and apps that got the chop.

  32. Identity Management by The+Second+Horseman · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The bigger issue for Oracle isn't Linux, it's Novell's Identity Manager product - it's the best in the market. Oracle has been buying a lot of companies in the space, so they have 3 (or is it 4?) products, none integrated, with no clear future direction for folks buying a product.

    Oracle has been going to a lot of trouble to shove Novell's IDM out of shops by pressuring sites to switch to their identity management product lately.

    Of course, this could just be "Crazy Larry" trying to get IBM to blow a lot of cash buying Novell to prevent Oracle from controlling the intellectual property at issue in the SCO case.

  33. I see something alot more sinister. by saur2004 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    OK let say Oracle buys Novel. The first thing they could do, is use their much more substantial and well funded coral of land sharks in Novels fight against SCO. OK now lets say they win. Now Oracle can say they own UNIX IP outright.

    And now we get SCO round 2, but with a far more powerful and well-funded bank of land sharks.

  34. Personally... by sillypixie · · Score: 1

    ... before Oracle heads down yet another purchasing road, I'd like to see something done with their marketing and sales group - something consistent with the fact that this company is no longer only a database company. My suggestion would be to fire them all and bring in people who are willing to learn and be flexible, instead of the entrenched backbiters they have now.

    I'd like to see the user communities that formed around COREid, Xcellerate, and other identity-related software get some support corporately.

    I'd like to see the corporate blogging policy reversed, so that the people who are passionate about the software they write can communicate to the people who want to learn about it.

    I'd like to see products who previously had 50 discussion forum groups and their own conferences, user groups, and mailing lists be brought back from post-purchase back alleys, where they are lucky if they share a discussion group with 6 other products, and where they are lost in the expanse of generic sugary topics at OpenWorld, on oracle.com, and inside metalink.

    If Larry really wants his all-encompassing stack to dominate, he's going to have to learn to communicate, not only through his sales and marketing force, but through the bright minds at his own company.

    Get with it Larry, or Oracle will inherit CA's title - the place where good software goes to die.

    Pixie

    --
    don't mess with those geekgrrls
    1. Re:Personally... by whatsisface · · Score: 1

      I think Oracle is doing a fairly good job with blogging, actually. And the Identity Management Discussion Forum on OTN contains many threads re: Xcellerate, COREid, etc.

    2. Re:Personally... by sillypixie · · Score: 1
      It contains one discussion group for all of the Identity Management. Which is lumped in under "Application Server" for some unfathomable reason. Which means you have to parse through all of the products to figure out which threads are for the product you yourself are using.

      Here is the summary of the single discussion group:
      This forum is for discussion of Oracle Identity Management components, including Oracle Internet Directory, OracleAS Single Sign-On, OracleAS Certificate Authority, Oracle COREid Access and Identity, Oracle COREid Federation, Oracle Xellerate Identity Provisioning, Oracle Virtual Directory, and Oracle Web Service Manager.

      How easy is it to find applicable threads in that?

      Pix
      --
      don't mess with those geekgrrls
  35. Not a good move by Ian.Waring · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The #1 thing that Linux gives to users (that they value highly) is choice of hardware and software on commodity (read: Intel or AMD) platforms. From a commercial subscription market share perspective, it's just about game over; Red Hat is up there in 90% plus land with SUSE collecting almost all of the few remaining crumbs.

    To date, Novell is stronger on PR (Google search volumes on "SUSE" are almost at Red Hat levels) but are struggling really badly to monetise this.

    The best thing that Oracle could do would be to support both equally. As stupid as it sounds, everyones best interest is served by having two (or more) Linux distributions duking it out.

  36. Read the article again by houghi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    FTFA: Oracle had considered buying Novell Inc

    The way I read it, it means: We looked at buying Novell, but instead will be launching our own Linux distribution.

    Oh and they are "considering" their own distro. So to sum the article up: business as usual.

    Absolute no decisions are taken and most likely nothing will happen. If this were about Microsoft, the whole article would be called FUD.

    Move along, nothing to see here.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:Read the article again by LnxAddct · · Score: 1

      This is just the "Oh shit, we were going to buy JBoss and kill it off, but Red Hat bought it and saved it last week, let's try to intimidate the market now so people know that we are powerful and no one else can dare compete." With so many companies moving to JBoss and other alternatives, including open source databases, Larry Ellison is shitting himself fearing that he may never become richer than Bill Gates. Novell is already known for making good product lines deteriorate, and you're starting to see that in Suse, if Oracle buys Novell then you'll just see the whole distro collapse. Oracle can do databases well, but never did supporting utitilities well. Larry would also want Suse locked down so that everything only works with Oracle products, that is the way Larry thinks... he hates alternatives, and he'll do what he can to stop you or dissaude you from running MySql or Postgres.
      Regards,
      Steve

  37. trifecta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

  38. i'm just guessing how it'd called by C0vardeAn0nim0 · · Score: 3, Funny

    maybe "Larinx".

    "larry" plus "*nix", got it ? no ? well, whatever.

    --
    What ? Me, worry ?
  39. Novell to be bought out? by FridayBob · · Score: 1

    I used to be a CNE 3/4/5 before Novell became almost irrelevant, but this is the first news I've heard that they might be bought out by another company. Many people have said that Novell's fall from grace was their own fault, but knowing Microsoft, in the end I don't think their was anything Novell could have done about it.

    If Novell does get relegated to the history books, I'll be sorry to see them go. I still like the way NDS (um, eDirectory) works and would love to see an open source alternative to it appear. Well, I suppose LDAP could do the trick, but it's still comparatively fiddly to work with and support for it needs to be much more widespread.

    As for Oracle, they've got lots of money, so if Larry wants to acquire Novell in order to use their expertise to start building Linux systems using SuSE, eDirectory and Oracle, that sounds fine to me!

  40. Larry: just retire by penguin-collective · · Score: 0, Troll

    Oracle was a one-time deal--a combination of excellent timing for bringing out an RDBMS, good business skills, and a lot of luck. I don't think Ellison has it in him to repeat the success. And if he did, he wouldn't be futzing around buying FOSS operating systems, he'd come up with a new idea and found a new company.

    1. Re:Larry: just retire by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      eh? have you seen Oracle's financials, profitable making money hand over fist.

    2. Re:Larry: just retire by penguin-collective · · Score: 1

      Well, hey, if everything is fine and dandy and if they can just keep making money hand over fist with their existing products, they don't need to buy Novell.

    3. Re:Larry: just retire by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      heh, they want "mo' money", and probably more control over how an OS is configured to run their warez, right now for a big enterprise deal Oracle and OS (as in redhat and SuSE) and filesystem (as in Veritas and Polyserve) and backup (Veritas, Legato, etc.) and SAN (HP, Hitachi, EMC, etc.) and server vendors (IBM, Sun, HP, Dell) get into each other's hair and drive the client nuts trying to tell them how to set things up. As "Enterprise Unix/Linux Engineer" who does implementations/migrations for clients of a hardware reseller I can tell you things get very, very ugly.

  41. Not quite... by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 3, Informative

    As far as I know, the Ubuntu foundation operates independently of Canonical, Ltd. Canonical could pull all support for Ubuntu in favor of Ubuntu Enterprise Edition (a la Red Hat), but free Ubuntu would live on because Canonical can't take away the Ubuntu Foundation's $10,000,000+ war chest.

    You should also note the grandparent's use of the word corporate. Red Hat is indeed a publically traded corporation, while Canonical is a privately held Limited Partnership. There's a big difference between those two when it comes to legal rights, shareholder obligations, and overall evil-ness.

    1. Re:Not quite... by spiritraveller · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, the Ubuntu foundation operates independently of Canonical, Ltd.

      How does a post that starts with "as far as I know" get modded +4 informative?

      All you have to do is look at the bottom of the page at ubuntu.com.

      "© 2005 Canonical Ltd. Ubuntu and Canonical are registered trademarks of Canonical Ltd."

      You should also note the grandparent's use of the word corporate. Red Hat is indeed a publically traded corporation, while Canonical is a privately held Limited Partnership. There's a big difference between those two when it comes to legal rights, shareholder obligations, and overall evil-ness.

      Buzzz... wrong again. The suffix "Ltd." does not mean "limited partnership". Ltd. is a suffix added to British companies (and companies in some other countries) to show that the liability of investors in the company is limited to their investment... in other words, it is a corporation. See this wikipedia article for more details.

      I use ubuntu on a daily basis (using it right now in fact). The fact that a corporation is behind it doesn't mean it's bad.

    2. Re:Not quite... by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      "The fact that a corporation is behind it doesn't mean it's bad."

      You're right. Companies like Microsoft, the Oil companies, and other huge businesses have given the corporation a bad name. Corporations aren't inherently bad, and quite often they provide services or products that people want and really like. Or need. The corporation actually enables more small businesses to exist - limited liability is a big plus when you don't have millions of dollars in the bank.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    3. Re:Not quite... by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 1

      Ok, my information regarding the "Ltd." was a little screwy. I still can't find concrete information on it, but it appears as though Wikipedia is strongly implying that (at least in the USA) it's the same as an LLC. Well, my statement still stands--a privately held LCC is not as powerful or evil as a publically traded corporation. If you think that an LLC has the same powers as an corporation, you need to go back to business school. There's a reason why every large-scale company is a Inc. instead of a Ltd. or LLC in spite of the fact that the latter two have very attractive tax benefits.

      And yes, publically traded corporations do have a natural tendency towards evil, if for no other reason than shareholder obligations. A privately held *anything* isn't legally obligated to do maximize shareholder profit--public corperations are. Anything other than an Inc. tends to have a short lifespan, too... whereas Inc. can live for hundreds of years.

      Regarding Canonical and the Ubuntu foundation... that statement proves nothing. Am I 100% sure of the facts? No. But the trademark means nothing... they can call it the magical cucumber distro for all I care. As long as the Ubuntu Foundation has their multi-million dollar war chest, the free Ubuntu (or magic cucumber) distribution will not fade away like Red Hat did. I highly doubt that Mark Shuttleworth or Canonical has the power to take away money they've already given to the Ubuntu Foundation. Non-profit foundations are tax shelters, and I'm pretty sure that there are laws saying you can't haphazardly take back money you've given to them for the simple reason that it would be a rather blatant example of tax evasion.

      So, everything I said still basically stands. Red Hat was beholden to its shareholders in a way that that Canonical is not, and even if Canonical declared war on free Ubuntu they could not have done the damage Red Hat did when they killed Red Hat linux and replaced it with Fedora (or more importantly, the damage they could have done if they had decided to simply discontinue non-enterprise Red Hat development altogether.)

    4. Re:Not quite... by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between saying that corporations tend towards evil and saying that corporations are an unwanted or unneeded evil. I believe that publicly traded corporations *are* inherently evil, willing to do *anything* they can get away with to make a profit, but I believe that they are a necessary evil.

  42. Why.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..none of these linux distros has included a "PDC Install" option yet befuddles me. I've spent too much time trying to get this to work, and there are plenty of working versions out there, just in too limited a form. Even just a launch wizard to get started would be nice. And they wonder why SOHOs haven't embraced them at all.

  43. I would welcome Larry's takeover of Novell.... by DiamondGeezer · · Score: 1

    ...for many reasons. Principally so he can lay waste to the most incompetent fucknozzles ever to wear a suit. Internal slogan: "Novell: The leading provider of useless managers" Sharpen that axe Larry and call me for I have a little list....

    --
    Tubby or not tubby. Fat is the question
  44. I just wrote about this by MarkWatson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I blogged about this today: the next step in the commoditization of operating systems: application and tool vendors include the operating system and every thing in one complete software stack.

    This is not as crazy as I might have thought a few years ago because of virtualization tools like Xen (etc.) However, if companies like Oracle start selling the 'whole stack' I hope that they offer versions that are built for Xen.

  45. LFS should be enough for anyone by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Only pansys need a distro.. be a man and do it yourself..

    Ok, so im only kidding. somewhat.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  46. Larry's Buying Spree by yancey · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Why is it that Larry's on a buying spree lately? Can't he do anything useful with his own company?

    --
    Ouch! The truth hurts!
  47. SuSE is Better for Oracle by bloobamator · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have installed and operated several production Oracle db's on both RedHat and SuSE. SuSE is by far superior for Oracle. SuSE supports Oracle much better than RedHat does. It's much easier to install Oracle on SuSE, and SuSE has a very nice mailing list for Oracle dba's, with moderators from both companies. So in this sense, SuSE is a much more attractive acquisition target for Mr. Lawrence "Gotta Have It" Ellison.

    --
    "Crude and slow, clansman. Your attack was no better than that of a clumsy child."
    1. Re:SuSE is Better for Oracle by (H)elix1 · · Score: 1

      I have installed and operated several production Oracle db's on both RedHat and SuSE. SuSE is by far superior for Oracle. SuSE supports Oracle much better than RedHat does. It's much easier to install Oracle on SuSE, and SuSE has a very nice mailing list for Oracle dba's, with moderators from both companies.

      Not only that, but SuSE is a much better platform for DB2 as well. Most of the IBM systems I've worked with are almost always SuSE SLES, even though RH was an option. If nothing else, they could mess up some of the x, z, and i Linux loving on the database side with the buy.

  48. OpenSolaris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Would a customized OpenSolaris make more sense?

    1. Re:OpenSolaris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then again, buying RedHat would probably make investors very happy.

  49. Re:Solid KDE Support by mpapet · · Score: 1

    Yeah they're still supporting KDE.

    They even made a version (or two?) upgrade available via rpm. My suse 9.3 looks great and works even better.

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
  50. If Oracle buys Novell. . . by kimvette · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Ubuntu will be my distribution of choice, not SuSE.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  51. It's not the software that's being purchased here by melted · · Score: 1

    It's not the software that's being purchased here, it's the expertise and customer base. Every SW company acquisition that I've seen happen ended with throwing away, heavily modifying or rewriting software that came with the deal, sooner or later. Which kind of tells you that it's not software that was being purchased, but people and customer base.

  52. Had to LOL on this one by invisik · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Dang, Oracle is fiesty. I know big Lar wants to kick it up a notch, but sheesh, give us a break. Just partner with RH/Novell and offer bundles or something. You don't have to buy the whole frickin' company!

    Besides, the world does not need yet another Linux distro.

    -m

    --
    http://www.invisik.com
  53. Customers and consultants by truthsearch · · Score: 1

    Not only would purchasing Novell bring them are large set of customers, it would also give them a team of business consultants. It's not all about the software. It's business strategy. Why would they buy a distro when they can also have a team of experts to deal with linux customers?

    1. Re:Customers and consultants by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1
      it would also give them a team of business consultants.
      Who don't, on current results, seem to be doing avery good job. Or the takeover would be the other way round.
      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
  54. they can't do this in house? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oracle doesn't have enough moxie to come up with a linux distro all by themselves? Look at distrowatch, it takes one guy to come up with a distro working part time at home. Seems like whatever large number would be required in dollars to go purchase Novell or some other place with a distro that they could just hire a lot of devs and come up with their own clone. Probably do it over the weekend if they tried. Now what WOULD be interesting is if instead of just doing that, they enetered the PC business that had linux and oracle pre installed, so it all just worked out of the box. That's what the linux. inc biz needs is a major hardware vendor with desktop to server support. IBM sort of does it but it starts at expensive and goes to the OMG level. Hey, they could buy SGI for like 20 bucks or something, build commodity clones at the low end, something sgi-ish (but affordable for biz) in the middle and upper end. Run their brand linux and oracle, then start work on the other major windows holdouts like design software and accounting, etc. If they cut a deal with AMD to be their major retailer with the chips/boxes, the rest could follow. How about video cards? Wouldn't it be nice to have a major vid card that was designed from the get-go to run on linux? They could nail (start to nail) the high end gaming market and graphics design then as well. It's the *integration* that is important, look at how apple does it. It's a vertical envelop design, that is why it works. Same with Sun on their midrange, vertical, works.

    Hey, all these other guys get to do wild assed speculations!

  55. Is this even a story?!? by AtlantaSteve · · Score: 3, Funny

    Man, the standards for Slashdot articles seem to be slipping by the day. Now all it takes to get people talking is speculation about PAST events that didn't even happen?

    Back in 1985, rock guitarist Slash (of later Guns 'n Roses fame) almost joined Poison, to take the spot which eventually went to C.C. Deville. There, babble about the relevance of that for awhile.

    1. Re:Is this even a story?!? by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      well, half of the story didn't happen, but interesting to some of us that oracle is considering their own distro. Some of us are stuck doing alot of things involving Oracle for a living...

  56. xgl? by Danzigism · · Score: 1

    I wonder if any of this has to do with Novell's Development on the xgl 3d desktop accelerated X server.. it does look pretty freakin' amazing.. I don't think thats the main reason of course Oracle would be interested in Novell and Linux.. But I wouldn't be surprised after seeing a demonstration of xgl, that there was some pretty excited people out there..

    --
    *plays the Apogee theme song music*
    1. Re:xgl? by Danzigism · · Score: 1

      and yes i'm aware that Novell didn't actually develop xgl. just made it better..

      --
      *plays the Apogee theme song music*
  57. IIRC - Oracle For Linux is/was developed on SuSE by HighOrbit · · Score: 1

    Several years ago (circa 1999 or Redhat version 6 ), I read that Oracle on Linux was developed and targeted for Suse. I remember this because I was having issues tweaking RH for an Oracle 8 install, and a lot of the mail lists mentioned that some of the tweaks were not necessary for SuSE. So I would guess that it would be just a bit easier for Oracle to adopt Suse outright, if that is what their developers are already using.

  58. I, for one, ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, for one, would welcome one raging asshole overlord for some of Linux. :-)

  59. Novell to aquire.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uhhh....I would be watching for Novell to be doing some aquisitions of their own...very shortly :o)

  60. Novell-Oracle Colaboration by infosec_spaz · · Score: 1
    --
    ----- I have bad karma for a reason! -----
  61. Oracleenex! by SenseOfHumor · · Score: 1

    Oracleenex - now available in two versions: Lite and 2-ply (for redundancy)!!!

  62. Tricky by FishandChips · · Score: 1

    Novell is capitalized at +/- $3 billion. At present, pure SuSE accounts for well under 10 per cent of Novell's turnover, though it was barely 3 per cent a year ago. Novell are sitting on a lot of cash, so one could subtract that from the purchase price, I guess. Even so, after discounting the cash reserves, getting on for £2 billion seems an awful lot of money to pay for SuSE Linux unless Oracle want a lot of Novell's other things, or can figure out how to sell them off. This is a problem that may cause a few companies to blanch at acquiring Novell. I guess even a fraction of that kind of money would pay for a pretty nice Linux distro of your own.

    --
    Las qué passoun
    tournoun pas maï
  63. Larry lying again? by workboomer · · Score: 0

    Is it possible that Larry is lying to get back at JBOSS? Since JBOSS did not agree to Oracle's terms for an acquisition and lost JBOSS to Redhat, he may just be floating this idea to bring down RHAT. no?

  64. That was your personnal experience, by porky_pig_jr · · Score: 1

    and mine was Red Hat (I couldn't even install SUSE), and somebody else had the best experience with Ubuntu, etc, etc. As always, YMMV.

    1. Re:That was your personnal experience, by GebsBeard · · Score: 1

      Actually I had the exact opposite experience of GP. Running TYAN S2895 (K8WE) motherboard the SuSE 10.0 install worked through the first CD and then yast choked as soon as I inserted the second disk, spewing a bunch of MD5 checksum errors on packages it was trying to install. The disks were flawless (not corrupted) according to its own disk testing procedure. Never could figure out the problem but it probably has something to do with the hardware. (If you know what the solution is please let me know cause I'd love to be running SuSE).

  65. RH started it with JBoss ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    JBoss is competing with Oracle AppServer stack. RH bought it.

    So this would be ORacle's response ...

    If RH pushes Jboss against Oracle too much ... no more Oracle's support for RH ...

    Nice move Larry ...

  66. SuSE Big - by IMightB · · Score: 1

    Autoyast - I can't stand it...
    Kickstart is so much easier to use and maintain a config file for.

    Besides I've had a few servers where for no apparent reason a yast process ( I think it the update check) suddenly takes up 99% of the CPU. Yast is too big and bulky I don't care for it.

  67. deja vu ... raw iron anyone ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    google on "raw iron oracle" and tell me you don't see ghosts of Xmas past ... ;)

  68. DCC Common Core by sendtwogrey · · Score: 1

    While it's interesting that the higher tier distro's are being snapped up to support back-end systems when overlaying on a DCC Common Core Linux distro seems the obvious solution. Maybe it's just me that feels that Oracle doesn't need 8 GB of miscellaneous software, nor a NFS/mail/HTTP on the same server. What's really interesting to me though is that Adobe/Macromedia hasn't linked themselves to a particular distro even though rumour has it that their Linux versions are well underway, then they really need a desktop to role out their workstations on and they no longer seem keen to dance to the Microsoft/Apple tune never mind a GTK based KDE. Could they have their own desktop underway? They do do graphics don't they?

  69. Larry owns RH? by martinschrder · · Score: 1

    Do you have any source for your claim that Larry owns 1/3 of RH? Because I can't find his name here.

  70. What next? by wetfeetl33t · · Score: 1

    Apparently, Oracle is considering buying the United States, and is looking to buy China too

    --
    Register the editry.
  71. Almost makes sense by etrusco · · Score: 1

    Oracle doesn't need a Linux distro of its own, it just needs an optimized kernel and then whatever it's their application (Database, AppServer, OIS, etc) _it_ is the distro. It simply doesn't make sense to run anything alongside an Oracle fscking-memory-hog Database in the same server.
    That's the beauty of Linux/opensource: a commoditized OS/platform.

  72. Oracle already has a Linux Distro... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    it's called Miracle Linux

  73. Why the hell? by autophile · · Score: 1
    I know an old Oracle who wanted to buy Novell.
    I asked why the hell they would buy Novell...
    but they won't tell.

    --Rob

    --
    Towards the Singularity.
  74. Having worked 9iAS & Core by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    It makes sense that an OS would come up.

    But, IBM would be a better fit for SuSE. Oracle maybe better off with RedHat, but I doubt they will ever sell.

    Buy Novell, but keep the company separate from Oracle Core (DB) and I think we have a winner.

  75. Re:yay YIIKESS!! by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    It could get worse! mshaft could buy or take a 25% stake in Novell and then back SCO and confuse the hell out of the Linux/Oracle users, making it impossible for Oracle to buy Novell.

    But, then doing that might make ms look as if they NEED Linux technicians on new/different/diverging projects, or make ms look DESPERATE.

    OTOH, Maybe IBM might throw in a wad of cash to merge some Novell technology and Linux here and there with IBM's own stuff, keeping mshaft AND Oracle at bay for a couple business cycles, maybe up to 10 years...

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  76. Leisure suit Larry by floydman · · Score: 1

    looking for business in several wrong places.....

    --
    The lunatic is in my head